MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765883112 · doi:10.23638/lmcs-14(1:12)2018

Automated Synthesis of Distributed Self-Stabilizing Protocols

2018· preprint· en· W2765883112 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fathiyeh Faghih, Borzoo Bonakdarpour, Sébastien Tixeuil, Sandeep S. Kulkarni

Bibliographic record

VenueLogical Methods in Computer Science · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMutual exclusionComputer scienceToken ringDijkstra's algorithmDistributed computingMonotonic functionProtocol (science)Ideal (ethics)Self-stabilizationState (computer science)Set (abstract data type)Security tokenLeader electionTheoretical computer scienceDistributed algorithmTopology (electrical circuits)AlgorithmComputer networkMathematicsGraphProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce an SMT-based method that automatically synthesizes a distributed self-stabilizing protocol from a given high-level specification and network topology. Unlike existing approaches, where synthesis algorithms require the explicit description of the set of legitimate states, our technique only needs the temporal behavior of the protocol. We extend our approach to synthesize ideal-stabilizing protocols, where every state is legitimate. We also extend our technique to synthesize monotonic-stabilizing protocols, where during recovery, each process can execute an most once one action. Our proposed methods are fully implemented and we report successful synthesis of well-known protocols such as Dijkstra's token ring, a self-stabilizing version of Raymond's mutual exclusion algorithm, ideal-stabilizing leader election and local mutual exclusion, as well as monotonic-stabilizing maximal independent set and distributed Grundy coloring.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLogical Methods in Computer ScienceSame topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207